Hmmm. iPod av. An 'iChat' iPod? That would be pretty incredible...
I'd expect IBM to break the 3 gig barrier. We never did get those '1.4' 970s. Similarly, if we get dual 3.2 gig machines next July then that would be a nice 'surprise'.
As for the rest of the range? Erm.
Well, Moto' might pull their 0.09 out of the hat. But I'd rather see an IBM solution. The more business IBM gets the better their reward for their R&D on Apple's behalf. No point splitting Apple's chip revenue to two partners...especially when one of them is incredibly lousy. The 'drip feed' of Power derivative tech' is obviously the way forward. By the time Apple gets Power 5 tech 'G6' then the consumer range will be blazing on with G5 speeds. G4? 2004 and the G4 will be a forgotten memory by the time the G6 presumably launches early 2005.
IBM 'G4' at higher speeds. Possible. We haven't seen any faster G4s than 1.4 gig. An IBM 'G3 with Altivec'? A dual core G3 based product? With 900mhz iBooks, IBM's G3 isn't that far off mhz parity with Apple's 1.25 gig G4s.
I'd have though some 'low power' 1.2 970s would have done for the meantime until the .09 970s take off.
But it looks like 1.25 gig eMacs until 0.09 970s come on steam.
Late 2004, everything should be a 970...with the Powermacs leading the mhz charge. First half 2004? 970 bumps and Apple's consumer range still and FINALLY in its G4 death throws.
There'll be no reason to have a G4 processor that can't scale, lousy bus, half cocked support for faster memories...
Hmmm. iPod av. An 'iChat' iPod? That would be pretty incredible...
I'd expect IBM to break the 3 gig barrier. We never did get those '1.4' 970s. Similarly, if we get dual 3.2 gig machines next July then that would be a nice 'surprise'.
As for the rest of the range? Erm.
Well, Moto' might pull their 0.09 out of the hat. But I'd rather see an IBM solution. The more business IBM gets the better their reward for their R&D on Apple's behalf. No point splitting Apple's chip revenue to two partners...especially when one of them is incredibly lousy. The 'drip feed' of Power derivative tech' is obviously the way forward. By the time Apple gets Power 5 tech 'G6' then the consumer range will be blazing on with G5 speeds. G4? 2004 and the G4 will be a forgotten memory by the time the G6 presumably launches early 2005.
IBM 'G4' at higher speeds. Possible. We haven't seen any faster G4s than 1.4 gig. An IBM 'G3 with Altivec'? A dual core G3 based product? With 900mhz iBooks, IBM's G3 isn't that far off mhz parity with Apple's 1.25 gig G4s.
I'd have though some 'low power' 1.2 970s would have done for the meantime until the .09 970s take off.
But it looks like 1.25 gig eMacs until 0.09 970s come on steam.
Late 2004, everything should be a 970...with the Powermacs leading the mhz charge. First half 2004? 970 bumps and Apple's consumer range still and FINALLY in its G4 death throws.
There'll be no reason to have a G4 processor that can't scale, lousy bus, half cocked support for faster memories...
Blue and green. Way past sell by date.
Lemon Bon Bon
That sounds nice!
That would make sense though. Everything using fast 970s with Powermacs and Powerbooks leading the way with the highest speeds and iMacs, eMacs, and iBooks using slower 970s that still beat the crap out of Motorlola G4s!
Forget about the XServe? 'cuase it's the next Apple product to get the next big step.
The iBook will be updated before the holidays, but it won't be a big update, since it can't surpass the 12" PowerBook in anyway.
The XServe has no such market placement limitations, and is currently lagging behind the G5 PowerMac. Obviously the XServe will get a G5 soon. If power and heat issues prevent a 1U G5 XServe then we'll see a 2U version. But what other changes will there be? I assume SATA will be used (and the the XServe RAID will be updated as well), and it will gain FireWire 800, and DDR 400 RAM, and every other advance the the PowerMac has, but I have a feeling there will be more. Apple left a lot out of the first XServe and it seems like it was a good move so far, but the 1st XServe was the 'humble entry', and now I think we might see more XServe models. One with redundant power supplies, and ECC memory will appeal to a high-end server market where they don't want redundancy through clusters. If you're doing high-end though, how high are you going? Will we see a quad G5? How about a blade? IBM is making a 970 blade, can Apple pull a Dell and rebrand it (of couse if would have a new case) lowering R&D and entry costs into a lucrative market? Apple's going to be a bigger player in IT than many think.
As for G5's in iMac's. I don't see it happening. If IBM's new 750VX chip is as good as it sounds I think Apple will call it a G4, maybe a G4+ or G4xtreme . The 750VX is supposed to hit 2 GHz, that wouldn't be a bad upgrade to the iMac. No need for a G5 in there. The iMac will get FireWire 800 and SATA sooner than expected, I think. Apple wants to push FW800 as far better than USB2.0, and SATA will help witht he internal layout of the iMac.
The PowerBook will get a G5 just as soon as Apple can make it work, but I'm betting on 9 months to a year from now. It'll definitely be a few months after the first PowerMac speed bump.
Forget about the XServe? 'cuase it's the next Apple product to get the next big step.
The iBook will be updated before the holidays, but it won't be a big update, since it can't surpass the 12" PowerBook in anyway.
The XServe has no such market placement limitations, and is currently lagging behind the G5 PowerMac. Obviously the XServe will get a G5 soon. If power and heat issues prevent a 1U G5 XServe then we'll see a 2U version. But what other changes will there be? I assume SATA will be used (and the the XServe RAID will be updated as well), and it will gain FireWire 800, and DDR 400 RAM, and every other advance the the PowerMac has, but I have a feeling there will be more. Apple left a lot out of the first XServe and it seems like it was a good move so far, but the 1st XServe was the 'humble entry', and now I think we might see more XServe models. One with redundant power supplies, and ECC memory will appeal to a high-end server market where they don't want redundancy through clusters. If you're doing high-end though, how high are you going? Will we see a quad G5? How about a blade? IBM is making a 970 blade, can Apple pull a Dell and rebrand it (of couse if would have a new case) lowering R&D and entry costs into a lucrative market? Apple's going to be a bigger player in IT than many think.
As for G5's in iMac's. I don't see it happening. If IBM's new 750VX chip is as good as it sounds I think Apple will call it a G4, maybe a G4+ or G4xtreme . The 750VX is supposed to hit 2 GHz, that wouldn't be a bad upgrade to the iMac. No need for a G5 in there. The iMac will get FireWire 800 and SATA sooner than expected, I think. Apple wants to push FW800 as far better than USB2.0, and SATA will help witht he internal layout of the iMac.
The PowerBook will get a G5 just as soon as Apple can make it work, but I'm betting on 9 months to a year from now. It'll definitely be a few months after the first PowerMac speed bump.
How fast is the 750VX compared to the Motorola G4s? Will it be noticably faster?
How fast is the 750VX compared to the Motorola G4s? Will it be noticably faster?
Also, what do you mean by SATA?
It's possible the 750VX will be quite a bit faster than a G4. IBM's been advancing the G3 for a while and will soon add an AltiVec compatible engine. The front side bus is already better than the G4. I don't know too much, but there's threads about it all over AI.
SATA is Serial ATA. It has faster throughput speeds, and doesn't use the flat ribbon cable that ATA/IDE uses. It's also somehow backwards compatible with regular ATA drives. I think (could be wrong here) that it also puts less strain on the processor.
Comments
Originally posted by shetline
Short for "fabrication process", the process by which chips are manufactured.
Ok, that makes sense. I'm slowly but surely learning...
Powerbook: What you guys said.
iMac: IBM G4.
iBook: IBM G4.
eMac: G3, but called a G4(by this time, it will be much faster than current G4's anyways).
iPod: NO FRICKIN IPOD AV
By IBM G4 I really mean next-gen G3.
Originally posted by CubeDude
Powermac: What you guys said.
Powerbook: What you guys said.
iMac: IBM G4.
iBook: IBM G4.
eMac: G3, but called a G4(by this time, it will be much faster than current G4's anyways).
iPod: NO FRICKIN IPOD AV
By IBM G4 I really mean next-gen G3.
When do you think the new IBM G4 will go into iMacs and Powerbooks?
That. Felt. Good.
Hmmm. iPod av. An 'iChat' iPod? That would be pretty incredible...
I'd expect IBM to break the 3 gig barrier. We never did get those '1.4' 970s. Similarly, if we get dual 3.2 gig machines next July then that would be a nice 'surprise'.
As for the rest of the range? Erm.
Well, Moto' might pull their 0.09 out of the hat. But I'd rather see an IBM solution. The more business IBM gets the better their reward for their R&D on Apple's behalf. No point splitting Apple's chip revenue to two partners...especially when one of them is incredibly lousy. The 'drip feed' of Power derivative tech' is obviously the way forward. By the time Apple gets Power 5 tech 'G6' then the consumer range will be blazing on with G5 speeds. G4? 2004 and the G4 will be a forgotten memory by the time the G6 presumably launches early 2005.
IBM 'G4' at higher speeds. Possible. We haven't seen any faster G4s than 1.4 gig. An IBM 'G3 with Altivec'? A dual core G3 based product? With 900mhz iBooks, IBM's G3 isn't that far off mhz parity with Apple's 1.25 gig G4s.
I'd have though some 'low power' 1.2 970s would have done for the meantime until the .09 970s take off.
But it looks like 1.25 gig eMacs until 0.09 970s come on steam.
Late 2004, everything should be a 970...with the Powermacs leading the mhz charge. First half 2004? 970 bumps and Apple's consumer range still and FINALLY in its G4 death throws.
There'll be no reason to have a G4 processor that can't scale, lousy bus, half cocked support for faster memories...
Blue and green. Way past sell by date.
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by dferigmu
Well, what do you guys think?
Powermac: 2-3 Ghz G5 by end of 2004?
iMac: color-cases, G4 7457 or G5?
eMac: new G3 by IBM?
Powerbook: G5 by end of 2004?
iBook: new G3 by IBM?
iPod: color screen, video capabilities?
Well, what do you guys think? I have no idea, so I'm putting this thread out to bring together what everyone has heard so far.
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
Hmmm. iPod av. An 'iChat' iPod? That would be pretty incredible...
I'd expect IBM to break the 3 gig barrier. We never did get those '1.4' 970s. Similarly, if we get dual 3.2 gig machines next July then that would be a nice 'surprise'.
As for the rest of the range? Erm.
Well, Moto' might pull their 0.09 out of the hat. But I'd rather see an IBM solution. The more business IBM gets the better their reward for their R&D on Apple's behalf. No point splitting Apple's chip revenue to two partners...especially when one of them is incredibly lousy. The 'drip feed' of Power derivative tech' is obviously the way forward. By the time Apple gets Power 5 tech 'G6' then the consumer range will be blazing on with G5 speeds. G4? 2004 and the G4 will be a forgotten memory by the time the G6 presumably launches early 2005.
IBM 'G4' at higher speeds. Possible. We haven't seen any faster G4s than 1.4 gig. An IBM 'G3 with Altivec'? A dual core G3 based product? With 900mhz iBooks, IBM's G3 isn't that far off mhz parity with Apple's 1.25 gig G4s.
I'd have though some 'low power' 1.2 970s would have done for the meantime until the .09 970s take off.
But it looks like 1.25 gig eMacs until 0.09 970s come on steam.
Late 2004, everything should be a 970...with the Powermacs leading the mhz charge. First half 2004? 970 bumps and Apple's consumer range still and FINALLY in its G4 death throws.
There'll be no reason to have a G4 processor that can't scale, lousy bus, half cocked support for faster memories...
Blue and green. Way past sell by date.
Lemon Bon Bon
That sounds nice!
That would make sense though. Everything using fast 970s with Powermacs and Powerbooks leading the way with the highest speeds and iMacs, eMacs, and iBooks using slower 970s that still beat the crap out of Motorlola G4s!
The iBook will be updated before the holidays, but it won't be a big update, since it can't surpass the 12" PowerBook in anyway.
The XServe has no such market placement limitations, and is currently lagging behind the G5 PowerMac. Obviously the XServe will get a G5 soon. If power and heat issues prevent a 1U G5 XServe then we'll see a 2U version. But what other changes will there be? I assume SATA will be used (and the the XServe RAID will be updated as well), and it will gain FireWire 800, and DDR 400 RAM, and every other advance the the PowerMac has, but I have a feeling there will be more. Apple left a lot out of the first XServe and it seems like it was a good move so far, but the 1st XServe was the 'humble entry', and now I think we might see more XServe models. One with redundant power supplies, and ECC memory will appeal to a high-end server market where they don't want redundancy through clusters. If you're doing high-end though, how high are you going? Will we see a quad G5? How about a blade? IBM is making a 970 blade, can Apple pull a Dell and rebrand it (of couse if would have a new case) lowering R&D and entry costs into a lucrative market? Apple's going to be a bigger player in IT than many think.
As for G5's in iMac's. I don't see it happening. If IBM's new 750VX chip is as good as it sounds I think Apple will call it a G4, maybe a G4+ or G4xtreme
The PowerBook will get a G5 just as soon as Apple can make it work, but I'm betting on 9 months to a year from now. It'll definitely be a few months after the first PowerMac speed bump.
the eMac already has a G4
Originally posted by spankalee
Forget about the XServe? 'cuase it's the next Apple product to get the next big step.
The iBook will be updated before the holidays, but it won't be a big update, since it can't surpass the 12" PowerBook in anyway.
The XServe has no such market placement limitations, and is currently lagging behind the G5 PowerMac. Obviously the XServe will get a G5 soon. If power and heat issues prevent a 1U G5 XServe then we'll see a 2U version. But what other changes will there be? I assume SATA will be used (and the the XServe RAID will be updated as well), and it will gain FireWire 800, and DDR 400 RAM, and every other advance the the PowerMac has, but I have a feeling there will be more. Apple left a lot out of the first XServe and it seems like it was a good move so far, but the 1st XServe was the 'humble entry', and now I think we might see more XServe models. One with redundant power supplies, and ECC memory will appeal to a high-end server market where they don't want redundancy through clusters. If you're doing high-end though, how high are you going? Will we see a quad G5? How about a blade? IBM is making a 970 blade, can Apple pull a Dell and rebrand it (of couse if would have a new case) lowering R&D and entry costs into a lucrative market? Apple's going to be a bigger player in IT than many think.
As for G5's in iMac's. I don't see it happening. If IBM's new 750VX chip is as good as it sounds I think Apple will call it a G4, maybe a G4+ or G4xtreme
The PowerBook will get a G5 just as soon as Apple can make it work, but I'm betting on 9 months to a year from now. It'll definitely be a few months after the first PowerMac speed bump.
How fast is the 750VX compared to the Motorola G4s? Will it be noticably faster?
Also, what do you mean by SATA?
Originally posted by dferigmu
How fast is the 750VX compared to the Motorola G4s? Will it be noticably faster?
Also, what do you mean by SATA?
It's possible the 750VX will be quite a bit faster than a G4. IBM's been advancing the G3 for a while and will soon add an AltiVec compatible engine. The front side bus is already better than the G4. I don't know too much, but there's threads about it all over AI.
SATA is Serial ATA. It has faster throughput speeds, and doesn't use the flat ribbon cable that ATA/IDE uses. It's also somehow backwards compatible with regular ATA drives. I think (could be wrong here) that it also puts less strain on the processor.